Trump's Tax Plan

[scotchtiger]

I agree with about 90% of this post (which makes us allies, not enemies). Really the only problem I have is with the tax breaks to the wealthy. The very wealthy are already doing just fine right now. They are getting richer every year and I have NO problem with this. However I do have a problem cutting their taxes given the problems we have domestically. There needs to be spending cuts for sure AND there needs to NOT be cuts to the main stream of revenue that this country has.

I think it depends on where you define wealthy and what effective rates you are trying to adjust. Is "wealthy" a $500K/yr dual-income family or Donald Trump and Warren Buffet? The media uses the latter as the image of wealthy, then wants to apply the punitive tax structure to the former.

If you are saying that billionaires who pay 15-25% effective rates shouldn't see a decrease, I agree 100%. Their effective rates probably need to go up. If you are saying dual-income families making mid-six-figures who are paying 30%+ effective rates shouldn't see a decrease, I disagree 100%.

 

[hopefultiger13]

I think it depends on where you define wealthy and what effective rates you are trying to adjust. Is "wealthy" a $500K/yr dual-income family or Donald Trump and Warren Buffet? The media uses the latter as the image of wealthy, then wants to apply the punitive tax structure to the former.

If you are saying that billionaires who pay 15-25% effective rates shouldn't see a decrease, I agree 100%. Their effective rates probably need to go up. If you are saying dual-income families making mid-six-figures who are paying 30%+ effective rates shouldn't see a decrease, I disagree 100%.

I think we are probably on the same page here for sure. Frankly, I'm not sure where that "wealthy" mark is. I'm certainly not interested in taxing the crap out of dual income families that are working hard and trying to get into that "wealthy" group. If you are a husband/wife team that's working 50+ hours a week ... and realize that I'm talking about REAL work... not where you come and go as you please and take long lunches and basically have a 2 hour work day where you tell your managers (who actually run the business) what to do...then I'm all for a tax break for you.

I think I'd be interested in finding the point at which a person/family starts using a disproportionate amount of resources compared to a normal middle class family. For instance big business owners and investors that own big buildings that require extra services to protect. Folks that do a lot of shipping, putting extra wear on roads and bridges, and requiring a far flung Navy to protect US interests. That kind of thing.

You know, once you get to the point where you are essentially living a life of luxury and getting richer and richer by essentially sitting on your ass and living off your investments. Again, I've got NO PROBLEM with folks like that (even the ones that inherited the cash). BUT, once you get to this point, shut the f up, pay your taxes to support the system that allowed your wonderful lifestyle and keep getting richer.

 

[scotchtiger]

I think we are probably on the same page here for sure. Frankly, I'm not sure where that "wealthy" mark is. I'm certainly not interested in taxing the crap out of dual income families that are working hard and trying to get into that "wealthy" group. If you are a husband/wife team that's working 50+ hours a week ... and realize that I'm talking about REAL work... not where you come and go as you please and take long lunches and basically have a 2 hour work day where you tell your managers (who actually run the business) what to do...then I'm all for a tax break for you.

I think I'd be interested in finding the point at which a person/family starts using a disproportionate amount of resources compared to a normal middle class family. For instance big business owners and investors that own big buildings that require extra services to protect. Folks that do a lot of shipping, putting extra wear on roads and bridges, and requiring a far flung Navy to protect US interests. That kind of thing.

You know, once you get to the point where you are essentially living a life of luxury and getting richer and richer by essentially sitting on your ass and living off your investments. Again, I've got NO PROBLEM with folks like that (even the ones that inherited the cash). BUT, once you get to this point, shut the f up, pay your taxes to support the system that allowed your wonderful lifestyle and keep getting richer.

Well count us in the category that doesn’t use more services than the absolute most basic family. No big buildings, no shipping, no far flung navy... Just two hard-working people putting in 90-100 combined hours a week. So do you agree that we should get a break?

Shoot, I drive 8K miles - maybe- per year. Far less than average. My wife is the same or less. No public transportation, no government programs, no subsidies, nothing from the government. We work hard, provide for our family, save responsibly and get hit with the absolute full weight of the tax code. Hopefully there are other sensible folks like yourself that realize this is a problem.

 

[hopefultiger13]

Well count us in the category that doesn’t use more services than the absolute most basic family. No big buildings, no shipping, no far flung navy... Just two hard-working people putting in 90-100 combined hours a week. So do you agree that we should get a break?

Shoot, I drive 8K miles - maybe- per year. Far less than average. My wife is the same or less. No public transportation, no government programs, no subsidies, nothing from the government. We work hard, provide for our family, save responsibly and get hit with the absolute full weight of the tax code. Hopefully there are other sensible folks like yourself that realize this is a problem.

Yes, I do.

 

[CUAngler]

New plan is out.

Looks like I'm already going to get screwed on being able to deduct student loan interest.

Also proposing to eliminate mortgage interest deduction on homes over 500k. Super.

 

[hopefultiger13]

Not surprised. There's going to be a bit of shiny stuff for the middle class, but that corporate tax cut is going to save Trump and his buds BILLIONS over the years. They are selling it as a "needed" reform to compete world wide. What a load of crap! After deductions, corporations pay closer to 20% (just below 19%) than the 40% they are claiming is killing them. That brings them down into the same ballpark as Germany and England. You aren't going to be able to beat companies that can pay their employees $1 a day no matter the tax cut.

Republicans don't give a damn about the middle class. They are run by the wealthy and always have been. That's why Trump has so many folks supporting HIM. Because the Republican party has been busy screwing the middle class since the days of Reagan. There are all these promises about how tax cuts to the wealthy and companies are going to "trickle down" and make things good for everyone. Everyone is still waiting. Trickle down economics CAN work, but it doesn't have ANYTHING to do with tax breaks. Companies expand and pay more/hire more when there is demand for their products, period. If a company's profits go up (as they would from a tax cut), that money goes into the pockets of the investors and the upper management.

Trump and company are about to take a giant dump all over the middle class and the country in general to line their own pockets. And the funny thing is that a bunch of Trump supporters will be out there cheering them own while the crap is still running down their backs.

 

[scotchtiger]

New plan is out.

Looks like I'm already going to get screwed on being able to deduct student loan interest.

Also proposing to eliminate mortgage interest deduction on homes over 500k. Super.

Yea, I don't like the mortgage part and I would have liked to see them keep the state income tax deductions, but cap it at a certain %.

Been traveling all day, so I need to see how the new brackets affect us. Reduction of marriage penalty could be a big help. We usually pay AMT, so that could help too. The mortgage part will hurt my wife who sells high end homes, but most of her income comes through S-Corp, so the 25% cap on that is a plus.

 

[iceheart08]

Yea, I don't like the mortgage part and I would have liked to see them keep the state income tax deductions, but cap it at a certain %.

Been traveling all day, so I need to see how the new brackets affect us. Reduction of marriage penalty could be a big help. We usually pay AMT, so that could help too. The mortgage part will hurt my wife who sells high end homes, but most of her income comes through S-Corp, so the 25% cap on that is a plus.

Update pls.

 

[scotchtiger]

Update pls.

Crunching the numbers and it's hard to tell exactly what we will save. The state tax deduction change is a huge hit. Without that change, it's a no-brainer huge savings. For me personally:

Pros:
-Overall lower rates on a dollar for dollar comparison
-My mortgage interest isn't impacted as my mortgage is grandfathered in
-We pay AMT and that goes away
-Majority of my wife's income is business pass-through, which now could be taxed at 25% instead of high marginal rate

Cons:
-Loss of state tax deduction appears to offset the lower rates for the most part

Irrelevant:
-Standard deduction increase - I will still itemize
-Child tax credit increase - assuming income limits will still be in place?

Overall, it looks like at worst I'll break even (this ignores the business pass-through rate). At best, we could see significant savings through the removal of AMT and introduction of the business pass-through rate. I just don't know how all of that will factor in. My rough projection includes a 5 figure tax bill reduction when factoring in AMT and pass-through rate.

I'd like to see them bring back the state tax deduction, but cap it at a certain %. This way basic funding for states is deductible, but we aren't subsidizing high-tax states. Something like, "state income taxes up to 5% of your gross income." If that happens, this is a home run for the scotchtiger household.

 

[iceheart08]

Crunching the numbers and it's hard to tell exactly what we will save. The state tax deduction change is a huge hit. Without that change, it's a no-brainer huge savings. For me personally:

Pros:
-Overall lower rates on a dollar for dollar comparison
-My mortgage interest isn't impacted as my mortgage is grandfathered in
-We pay AMT and that goes away
-Majority of my wife's income is business pass-through, which now could be taxed at 25% instead of high marginal rate

Cons:
-Loss of state tax deduction appears to offset the lower rates for the most part

Irrelevant:
-Standard deduction increase - I will still itemize
-Child tax credit increase - assuming income limits will still be in place?

Overall, it looks like at worst I'll break even (this ignores the business pass-through rate). At best, we could see significant savings through the removal of AMT and introduction of the business pass-through rate. I just don't know how all of that will factor in. My rough projection includes a 5 figure tax bill reduction when factoring in AMT and pass-through rate.

I'd like to see them bring back the state tax deduction, but cap it at a certain %. This way basic funding for states is deductible, but we aren't subsidizing high-tax states. Something like, "state income taxes up to 5% of your gross income." If that happens, this is a home run for the scotchtiger household.

are you concerned about the deficit increase?

 

[scotchtiger]

are you concerned about the deficit increase?

Yes, but we have a spending problem - not a revenue problem. Ideally, we would pair this tax bill with significant entitlement reform and spending cuts.

 

[FLaw47]

Yes, but we have a spending problem - not a revenue problem. Ideally, we would pair this tax bill with significant entitlement reform and spending cuts.

Well we both know they're not going to pair it with a spending cut. But hey! As long as it's good for #1, amirite?

 

[Casa_del_Tigre]

You can call it conservative, or liberal, or fvcking fancy pants...I don't care.

I disagreed with Obama bringing millions of people from known terrorist hotbeds into this country. I agree with Trump putting a stop to it.

What about the over spending for ICE??? Trump is spending much more money than Obama, but putting up rookie numbers at best. Maybe he should get Obama to help with immigration.

You are just like every other political party voter. You hear Obama said this, or Trump said this, and ignore the facts. Trump has been stopped by the Supreme Court and will continue to get stopped with the Muslim ban. Obama talked in favor of immigration while he was sending them out on busses.

I’m for increased immigration, but I’m not for increasing the budget without results. Trump has proven that he will do less with more money when it comes to immigration.

 

[Trading Tiger]

What about the over spending for ICE??? Trump is spending much more money than Obama, but putting up rookie numbers at best. Maybe he should get Obama to help with immigration.

You are just like every other political party voter. You hear Obama said this, or Trump said this, and ignore the facts. Trump has been stopped by the Supreme Court and will continue to get stopped with the Muslim ban. Obama talked in favor of immigration while he was sending them out on busses.

I’m for increased immigration, but I’m not for increasing the budget without results. Trump has proven that he will do less with more money when it comes to immigration.

Hate to break it to ya, but I don't even know what ICE is.

OK, so I looked it up...I would have recognized it if you had said INS, but that has gone away.

My response, statistics are very easily manipulated to show whatever outcome you want to see. Unemployment was something that the dem's loved to brag about when Obama was in office. But if you understand that unemployment does not count people who are not actively looking for a job, then you can quickly see the flaw. Why would people look for a job when Obama and the dem's were giving them money for not having a job? Doesn't make a whole lot of sense, does it?

 

[Casa_del_Tigre]

Hate to break it to ya, but I don't even know what ICE is.

OK, so I looked it up...I would have recognized it if you had said INS, but that has gone away.

My response, statistics are very easily manipulated to show whatever outcome you want to see. Unemployment was something that the dem's loved to brag about when Obama was in office. But if you understand that unemployment does not count people who are not actively looking for a job, then you can quickly see the flaw. Why would people look for a job when Obama and the dem's were giving them money for not having a job? Doesn't make a whole lot of sense, does it?

Dude, I’m a lean towards anti statism. I just like looking at the hypocrisy with republicans and democrats. Just two different parties picking and choosing freedoms.

 

[hopefultiger13]

Well we both know they're not going to pair it with a spending cut. But hey! As long as it's good for #1, amirite?

Well, I'm gonna stand up for Scotchtiger a bit here. At least he presents a reasonable argument for what he believes in. He and his wife are working hard, making a REALLY good living and providing for their family's future. THAT'S his #1 priority and he's straight up about it. Trump's beliefs and policies help him do that more than the Dems do. I can respect this even though I don't agree with everything he says. It makes sense to me why he's a Trump guy.

What I don't understand is the blue collar folks that are supporting him when his policies clearly are not helping them at all. I have a friend that's super conservative and a BIG Trump supporter. He's in his late 50s and is an independent contractor. He uses Obama care for his health insurance. Trump didn't pay the stuff that keeps the prices down. So his insurance jumped from about $200 per month to $750. Now you can argue for and against Obama Care and that's certainly beyond the scope of this thread. BUT for my friend, Obamacare was helping him a ton with his insurance and Trump's actions made his premiums go up. That's not debatable, it's just a fact. My friend blames Obama for his price increase and won't hear a word against Trump.

It's this kind of disconnect with the simple facts that really concern me. If you honestly believe in Trump and his policies... that's OK. Have at it. If you think he's terrible and his policies suck... that's OK. Have at it. BUT when you are in some sort of alternate reality about Trump and write off simple cause and effect as "fake news". I personally find that to be very scary. It's this type of person that elects some really bad folks.